Adenosquamous Carcinoma of the Cervix: A Population-Based Analysis.
adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix
incidence
nomogram
prognostic factors
risk classification system
Journal
Frontiers in oncology
ISSN: 2234-943X
Titre abrégé: Front Oncol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101568867
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
13
01
2021
accepted:
06
07
2021
entrez:
9
8
2021
pubmed:
10
8
2021
medline:
10
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Due to the rarity of adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix (ASCC), studies on the incidence, prognostic factors, and treatment outcomes of ASCC remain scarce. Therefore, we performed a retrospective population-based study to systematically investigate the characteristics of ASCC patients. Patients with a histopathologically confirmed diagnosis of ASCC were enrolled from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database between 1975 and 2016. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify the potential predictors of cancer-specific survival (CSS) in patients with ASCC. Selected variables were integrated to establish a predictive nomogram and the predictive performance of the nomogram was estimated using Harrell's concordance index (C-index), calibration curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA). A total of 1142 ASCC patients were identified and included in this study and were further randomized into the training and validation cohorts in a 7:3 ratio. The age-adjusted incidence of ASCC declined from 0.19 to 0.09 cases per 100,000 person-years between 2000 and 2017, with an annual percentage change of -4.05% (P<0.05). We identified age, tumor grade, FIGO stage, tumor size, and surgical procedure as independent predictors for CSS in ASCC patients and constructed a nomogram to predict the 3- and 5-year CSS using these prognostic factors. The calibration curve indicated an outstanding consistency between the nomogram prediction and actual observation in both the training and testing cohorts. The C-index was 0.7916 (95% CI: 0.7990-0.8042) and 0.8148 (95% CI: 0.7954-0.8342) for the training and testing cohorts, respectively, indicating an excellent discrimination ability of the nomogram. The DCA showed that the nomogram exhibited more clinical benefits than the FIGO staging system. We established and validated an accurate predictive nomogram for ASCC patients based on several clinical characteristics. This model might serve as a useful tool for clinicians to estimate the prognosis of ASCC patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Due to the rarity of adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix (ASCC), studies on the incidence, prognostic factors, and treatment outcomes of ASCC remain scarce. Therefore, we performed a retrospective population-based study to systematically investigate the characteristics of ASCC patients.
METHODS
METHODS
Patients with a histopathologically confirmed diagnosis of ASCC were enrolled from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database between 1975 and 2016. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify the potential predictors of cancer-specific survival (CSS) in patients with ASCC. Selected variables were integrated to establish a predictive nomogram and the predictive performance of the nomogram was estimated using Harrell's concordance index (C-index), calibration curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA).
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 1142 ASCC patients were identified and included in this study and were further randomized into the training and validation cohorts in a 7:3 ratio. The age-adjusted incidence of ASCC declined from 0.19 to 0.09 cases per 100,000 person-years between 2000 and 2017, with an annual percentage change of -4.05% (P<0.05). We identified age, tumor grade, FIGO stage, tumor size, and surgical procedure as independent predictors for CSS in ASCC patients and constructed a nomogram to predict the 3- and 5-year CSS using these prognostic factors. The calibration curve indicated an outstanding consistency between the nomogram prediction and actual observation in both the training and testing cohorts. The C-index was 0.7916 (95% CI: 0.7990-0.8042) and 0.8148 (95% CI: 0.7954-0.8342) for the training and testing cohorts, respectively, indicating an excellent discrimination ability of the nomogram. The DCA showed that the nomogram exhibited more clinical benefits than the FIGO staging system.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
We established and validated an accurate predictive nomogram for ASCC patients based on several clinical characteristics. This model might serve as a useful tool for clinicians to estimate the prognosis of ASCC patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34367953
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.652850
pmc: PMC8339955
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
652850Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Cui, Cong, Chen, Yang and Liu.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Gynecol Oncol. 2020 Nov;159(2):354-358
pubmed: 32888724
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2019 Mar;45(3):686-694
pubmed: 30623525
J Clin Oncol. 2000 Apr;18(8):1606-13
pubmed: 10764420
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998 May 1;41(2):307-17
pubmed: 9607346
Gynecol Oncol. 2007 Nov;107(2):310-5
pubmed: 17826822
JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Jul 1;179(7):879-880
pubmed: 31081850
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Sep;217(3):332.e1-332.e6
pubmed: 28522318
Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Jun;129(3):517-21
pubmed: 23528928
Obstet Gynecol. 1990 Jun;75(6):1012-5
pubmed: 2342726
J Ovarian Res. 2017 Jul 24;10(1):48
pubmed: 28738842
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2014 Feb;24(2):289-94
pubmed: 24407572
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2019 Feb;79(2):198-204
pubmed: 30792550
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2017 Oct;27(8):1722-1728
pubmed: 28617687
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2007 May-Jun;17(3):623-8
pubmed: 17309669
Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Mar;22(3):728-33
pubmed: 25605513
Gynecol Oncol. 2012 May;125(2):292-6
pubmed: 22293041
Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1992 Sep;99(9):745-50
pubmed: 1420015
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020 Jun;149(3):298-302
pubmed: 32246761
Lancet. 1997 Aug 23;350(9077):535-40
pubmed: 9284774
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2017 Jan;143(1):115-122
pubmed: 27646608
Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2019 Jan;32(1):61-68
pubmed: 30647547
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2019 Sep;41(9):1318-1324
pubmed: 31006541
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424
pubmed: 30207593
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2020 May 1;2020(55):3-13
pubmed: 32412076
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1988 Feb 6;296(6619):386-91
pubmed: 3125911
Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Dec;135(3):462-7
pubmed: 25312397
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2012 Oct;21(10):1031-7
pubmed: 22816437
Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Nov;135(2):208-12
pubmed: 25152438
Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Mar;132(3):618-23
pubmed: 24486605
Cancer. 2003 May 1;97(9):2196-202
pubmed: 12712471
Br J Cancer. 2014 Jan 7;110(1):42-8
pubmed: 24253502